Review: Phoenix Theatre's 'North of the Boulevard'

February 21, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

You can almost smell the set in the Phoenix Theatre's production of Bruce Graham's play "North of the Boulevard" (running through March 9).

Trip's Auto is the kind of place where the desk chair is held together with tape, the lights seem ready to short circuit at any moment, and outsiders are never quite sure who works there and who's just hanging out. It's not mentioned, but I'm guessing Trip's prices are pretty cheap. He's no saint, but he's trying to do the right thing.

But doing the right thing is becoming more complicated. And a neighbor's tree pushing its way through his wall is among the least of his problems.

I had the pleasure of seeing a number of Graham plays during his stint with the Philadelphia Festival Theatre for New Plays and his latest brings back memories of some of the better of them. His characters feel as if they've been around long before the play began and he creates an atmosphere where the humor and the tension come from their inability to control each other while they try to make use of their own damaged moral compasses. 

Smart, humane, and at times very funny, "North of the Boulevard" may call to mind some of the work of David Mamet. But Graham's rhythm is different. And the Phoenix foursome (Joshua Coomer, Rich Komenich, Ben Rose, and Bill Simmons) sometimes finds that rhythm, sometimes not. The early part of the play, where anecdotes, jokes, and details can seem random, is essential to establish this world and its people, but on the Thursday I attended, it often seemed rushed, as if the goal was to move as quickly as possible to the end-of-the-first-act incident that propels the action.

When it paused to let its characters breath, the production worked beautifully, finding the humor, humanity, and suspense in their desperation.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing

ADVERTISEMENT